Generational Dynamics World View

[SomeGuy]

German Catholics?  German Protestants were not involved?

[John J. Xenakis]

(02-09-2017, 11:19 AM)Marypoza Wrote: > you're right, l'm unable to. That doesn't mean l'm unaware of it's
> existence, bcuz obviously it exists. But l can't fathom how ppl
> can (mis)treat other human beings the way they do

So let me give you a couple more modern examples. An obvious
one is the Buddhist treatment of Rohingyas in Burma. Another
is the Shia/Alawite treatment of Sunni Muslims in Syria,
led by the psychopathic Bashar al-Assad.

But here's an American one that I've written about many times.

It's now well proven that Gen-X "financial engineers" got their
masters degrees in the 1990s, and then used their skills to purposely
create tens of trillions of dollars of fraudulent subprime mortgage
backed synthetic securities, and sold them to investors, hoping to
screw the Boomers. They caused millions of people to become homeless
or bankrupt, and not a single one has ever gone to jail.

OK, so these financial engineers did not send people to gas chambers,
but they're just as sociopathic in their willingness to destroy
people's lives with no pity. It's exactly the same sociopathy as the
Holocaust, differing only in extent.

** 26-Dec-15 World View -- 'The Big Short' - an infuriating movie about the financial crisis
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/x...tm#e151226


** 27-Dec-15 World View -- Reader comments on 'The Big Short' and the financial crisis
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/x...tm#e151227

[John J. Xenakis]

(02-09-2017, 12:13 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: > John X once again reveals that he hates only Leftist demagogues
> but is blinded to it on the Alt-Right. Whether he overtly hangs
> with them, he is de facto Alt-Right.

You know very well that I criticized Trump's xenophobic remarks
from day one, and still refer to them from time to time, though
I'm pleased that he's backed down from the worst of them.

(02-09-2017, 12:13 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: > #Pence2017 ProsecuteTreason

I'm not like you people on the loony left. I retain a balanced view,
and I criticize hatred and xenophobia on all sides, by all politicians
in all countries. In fact, I've been writing about xenophobia on the
right as well as the left for years.

But you people on the loony left allow Obama, James Hoffa, Black Lives
Matter, and Hollywood all spew vitriolic hatred without ever
criticizing it. You're probably proud of yourself for using the word
"demagogue," as if you've done something extremely brave.

Why don't you write a few paragraphs describing how disgusted you are
with these demagogues, and why you disagree with them. That would be
interesting to read, and would make your postings a little more
credible, at least to me, and would lead to an interesting discussion.

On the other hand if, as I suspect, you're unable to do something as
simple as explicitly criticizing these demagogues, then you're in the
same Basket of Demogogues with them.

[John J. Xenakis]

(02-09-2017, 12:59 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: > German Catholics? German Protestants were not involved?

Sorry, I should have said German Christians.

I admit that there is an unanswered question in my mind about this.
There are a couple of dozen Protestant denominations in Germany, and I
would guess that some of them supported the Holocaust and others did
not. At any rate, there was no common policy. But in the 1930s, it
was still official Catholic policy that the Jews were to blame for the
death of Jesus Christ, as specified by the 1555 "Cum Nimis Absurdu"
Papal bull, and the Jews were not officially forgiven until 1986. And
so suspicion has to fall far more upon the Catholics than on the
Protestants.

** 25-May-14 World View -- Pope Francis visits Mideast to reconcile with Jews, Orthodox, and Muslims
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/x...tm#e140525

[SomeGuy]

(02-09-2017, 01:49 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(02-09-2017, 12:59 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: >   German Catholics?  German Protestants were not involved?

Sorry, I should have said German Christians.

I admit that there is an unanswered question in my mind about this.
There are a couple of dozen Protestant denominations in Germany, and I
would guess that some of them supported the Holocaust and others did
not.  At any rate, there was no common policy.  But in the 1930s, it
was still official Catholic policy that the Jews were to blame for the
death of Jesus Christ, as specified by the 1555 "Cum Nimis Absurdu"
Papal bull, and the Jews were not officially forgiven until 1986.  And
so suspicion has to fall far more upon the Catholics than on the
Protestants.

** 25-May-14 World View -- Pope Francis visits Mideast to reconcile with Jews, Orthodox, and Muslims
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/x...tm#e140525

No worries.  The thing is, Germany is a majority Protestant country, even with Austria included.  They were only about a third of the population in the 1930s, and were suspected of dual loyalties by the Nazi party, which persecuted the Church itself.  Political Catholicism had been been an issue in Germany from the kulturkampf in the 19th century to the Zentrum party into the 20th.  Catholic nobleman like Claus Staffenberg were prominent in the right-wing opposition to Hitler (Staffenberg in particular cited his Catholicism in his growing dislike of the Nazis), and it was the staunchly Catholic Konrad Adenauer who was there to pick up the reins after the Nazi regime was overthrown.  Nor were the more culturally Catholic Fascist regimes in Spain and Italy more anti-Semitic than the Nazis, indeed, they were far less.

This is not to say that the Church up until Vatican II (and really a little since then) wasn't a deeply conservative organization, long suspicious of democracy and comfortable cozying up to reactionary regimes.  I just don't think that they were the driving force behind the Nazi's particular obsession with the Jews.

*I've used Wiki articles because they are convenient for consolidating information (as an encyclopedia should), I can use other sources if you like.

[John J. Xenakis]

*** 10-Feb-17 World View -- Kenya's High Court blocks attempt to close Dadaab refugee camp

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Kenya's High Court blocks attempt to close Dadaab refugee camp
  
• Closure of Dadaab demanded after 2015 Garissa University attack in Kenya
  

****
**** Kenya's High Court blocks attempt to close Dadaab refugee camp
****


Somali refugees in the Dadaab refugee camp (Reuters)

Attempts by the government of Kenya to close down Dadaab refugee camp,
the world's largest refugee camp, have been set back by a decision by
the country's High Court ruling that closing the camp is
unconstitutional. According to judge John Mativo:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"The government's decision specifically targeting
> Somali refugees is an act of group persecution, illegal
> discriminatory and therefore unconstitutional."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Dadaab was set up in 1991 to house families fleeing conflict in
neighboring Somalia, including the lawlessness and recurrent droughts.
(Recall that 1993 was the year of the famous "Black Hawk Down"
incident, where Somali militia fighters shot down two American
helicopters using rocket-propelled grenades. Mobs then hacked the
fallen pilots to death with machetes and dragged their mutilated
bodies through the streets as trophies.)

At its peak in 2012, the Dadaab refugee camp housed nearly a
half-million people. Many children had been born there and grown to
adulthood without ever leaving the camp. Since then, some Somalis
have left the camp and returned home voluntarily, and today Dadaab is
home to some 256,000 people.

A government spokesman said that Dadaab had become a haven for
al-Shabaab terrorists from Somalia, and that the court decision would
be appealed:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"The key reason for closure of the camp was that it
> had become a launch pad for various terrorist attacks by
> al-Shabaab. The camp has lost its humanitarian nature and become a
> haven for terrorism and other illegal activities.
>
> The lives of Kenyans matter. Our interest in this case, and in the
> closure of Dadaab refugee camp, remains to protect the lives of
> Kenyans.
>
> The closure of Dadaab camp has always drawn varying interest and
> opinions, both nationally and internationally however, the lives
> of Kenyans matter. It is for this reason that we shall be strongly
> appealing the decision by the High Court."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

In 2013, Kenya, Somalia and UNHCR signed a tripartite agreement that
all refugees should leave the camp and UNHCR would repatriate them all
voluntarily to Somalia by November 2016. However, the UNHCR effort
failed, and only 20,000 were repatriated.

Amnesty International called Wednesday's High Court ruling "historic":

> [indent]<QUOTE>"Today is a historic day for more than a quarter of a
> million refugees who were at risk of being forcefully returned to
> Somalia, where they would have been at serious risk of human
> rights abuses. This ruling reaffirms Kenya's constitutional and
> international legal obligation to protect people who seek safety
> from harm and persecution."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

The Star (Kenya) and BBC and AFP

Related Articles

• Kenya facing fierce criticism over closing the world's largest refugee camp (07-Jun-2016)
  
  
• Minnesota link to Kenya shopping mall attack raises U.S. fears (23-Sep-2013)
  

****
**** Closure of Dadaab demanded after 2015 Garissa University attack in Kenya
****

The plans for Dadaab changed dramatically in April 2015, when the
Somalia terrorist group al-Shabaab killed over 147 people, mostly
Christian students, at Garissa University College in Kenya. The
students were massacred in their dormitories. Christians were singled
out and shot dead. 79 were injured, and 587 were led to safety.

The Garissa attack had an effect on Kenya's public not unlike the
effect of the 9/11/2001 attack on Americans. Kenya announced numerous
changes to improve security, and one of them was that the Dadaab
refugee camp should be closed within three months.

The date for closure kept getting pushed back. In May of last year,
Kenya said that would close down the camp by the end of the year. In
November, the date was pushed into 2017.

The problem is that most of the refugees in Dadaab were born there and
have spent their whole lives there, so they have no place to go.
Kenya's government has tried "bribing" the refugees by offering $200
apiece to leave voluntarily. But with 260,000 refugees still
remaining in the camp today, it's pretty clear that the effort to
close the camp is failing and, according to some people, will never
succeed.

At any rate, Wednesday's High Court decision means that the attempt
will end completely, at least for the time being. The Nation (Kenya)

Related Articles

• Al-Shabaab kills 147 mostly Christian students at Garissa University College in Kenya (03-Apr-2015)
  
  
• Desperate Kenya demands closure of refugee camp after Garissa school attack (13-Apr-2015)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Kenya, Dadaab refugee camp, Somalia,
John Mativo, UNHCR, Garissa University College

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe

[Cynic Hero '86]

(02-09-2017, 10:28 AM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(02-08-2017, 02:35 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: >   Also JohnX seems convinced on certain Alignments of
>   countries. Take for example China's military alliances, China has
>   traditionally (for most of the last 35 years or so) relied on Iran
>   as its primary partner for military alliances. Saudi Arabia has
>   usually been a distant second in terms of technology sharing for
>   China than Iran has Been. Turkey has traditionally been Firmly in
>   the US sphere. Yet JohnX says that Russia and the US will ally and
>   that Iran would be aligned to the west, while turkey and Saudi
>   Arabia, two countries that have been western aligned since before
>   WW2 would suddenly ally with China against both the West and
>   Russia?

You answered your own question in the words "China has traditionally
(for most of the last 35 years or so)."  I sometimes joke about people
who believe that "history always begins this morning."

History did not begin 35 years ago.  Particularly when you're talking
about China, history began centuries or even millennia ago.
You have to go back at least to WW I and WW II when you ask
about these alignments.  The last 35 years are irrelevant.

China has military sharing and strategic Sharing arrangements with Iran and tends to support Iran in the UN and elsewhere since the iranian revolution of 1979. On the other hand It has no such arrangements with either Turkey or Saudi Arabia. Regarding Pre-ww2 relations, All of the Above middle eastern Countries were non-factors for the most part during WW1 and WW2.

[Cynic Hero '86]

Also regarding your earlier post to XYMOX regarding the demographic composition of the Nazis. The Nazis derived most of their Mass support from the Protestant areas of Northern and Eastern Germany. The Nazis in the elections leading up to Hitler's rise to power consistently performed poorly in the catholic areas of Western and Southern Germany. The Nazis also had less success in the Urban Areas (which were dominated by the Communist and Socialist parties) than elsewhere. While some of the Nazi leaders (Hitler himself and Himmler for example) did come from catholic regions; the Mass Base of the Nazi Support was derived from the Protestant and Prussian areas of Germany.

http://www.colorado.edu/ibs/intdev/johno...i_long.htm

[Ragnarök_62]

XYMOX'.sig

.sig Wrote:#Leach2020
#Pence2017
#ProsecuteTreason
#HUAC2.0
#RealNationalism
#NaziPunksFOff

1. Who's Leach?
2. Thought about adding a #BlackBlocPunksFoff?
3.One new line will make your .sig lucky 7 lines long.

[Marypoza]

(02-09-2017, 11:46 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: Also regarding your earlier post to XYMOX regarding the demographic composition of the Nazis. The Nazis derived most of their Mass support from the Protestant areas of Northern and Eastern Germany. The Nazis in the elections leading up to Hitler's rise to power consistently performed poorly in the catholic areas of Western and Southern Germany. The Nazis also had less success in the Urban Areas (which were dominated by the Communist and Socialist parties) than elsewhere. While some of the Nazi leaders (Hitler himself and Himmler for example) did come from catholic regions; the Mass Base of the Nazi Support was derived from the Protestant and Prussian areas of Germany.

http://www.colorado.edu/ibs/intdev/johno...i_long.htm

-- this would explain why the Church was persecuted then, if they didn't support the Nazis wholeheartedly. Interesting trivia about Himmler. I already know Hitler was raised Catholic-- not only was he an altar boy, he flirted with becoming a priest- but Himmler surprises me bcuz he was into alot of New Agey type stuff

[John J. Xenakis]

(02-09-2017, 02:17 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: > No worries. The thing is, Germany is a majority Protestant
> country, even with Austria included. They were only about a third
> of the population in the 1930s, [1]and were suspected of dual
> loyalties by the Nazi party, which persecuted the Church itself.
> Political Catholicism had been been an issue in Germany from the
> [2]kulturkampf in the 19th century to the [3]Zentrum party into
> the 20th. Catholic nobleman like [4]Claus Staffenberg were
> prominent in the right-wing opposition to Hitler (Staffenberg in
> particular cited his Catholicism in his growing dislike of the
> Nazis), and it was the staunchly Catholic [5]Konrad Adenauer who
> was there to pick up the reins after the Nazi regime was
> overthrown. Nor were the more culturally Catholic Fascist regimes
> in Spain and Italy more anti-Semitic than the Nazis, indeed, they
> were far less.

> This is not to say that the Church up until Vatican II (and really
> a little since then) wasn't a deeply conservative organization,
> long suspicious of democracy and comfortable cozying up to
> reactionary regimes. I just don't think that they were the
> driving force behind the Nazi's particular obsession with the
> Jews.

> *I've used Wiki articles because they are convenient for
> consolidating information (as an encyclopedia should), I can use
> other sources if you like.

> 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_C...zi_Germany
> 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kulturkampf
> 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centre_Party_(Germany)
> 4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claus_von_Stauffenberg
> 5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konrad_Adenauer

I realize that your last sentence is meant to be sarcastic, but I
actually do appreciate links to further information, and I save the
links when I save the posting.

In my own articles and postings, I try to provide links to pages
containing further information. My objective in providing links is
not to provide footnotes in the legal sense to make a legal case for
something, but rather to help those who want more information on a
subject. So I try to link to pages that provide the most useful,
complete and interesting analyses, even if some of that information
sometimes partially conflicts with something I've written, as long as
I think the reader will find the information valuable. I also assume
that anyone who reads my World View articles is intelligent enough to
see through any bias in the linked articles, as long as the article
provides complete information along with the analysis.

I never link to Wikipedia articles for many reasons. First, anyone
can easily find a wikipedia article on their own if that's what they
want. Second the wikipedia articles are written by a committee, and
heavily biased by the ideology of the wikipedia committee. Third,
wikipedia articles use a "least common denominator" approach and are
bland recitations of facts -- which serve a purpose, but not the
purpose I'm interested in. If I personally read a wikipedia article,
it's usually just to get a bare timeline of events, or to get links to
other, more useful articles.

You made a vile accusation that I always google a subject and just
provide the first link that appears. That's a despicable claim.
Actually, the first link is almost always to the wikipedia article, so
I choose the second link.

All kidding aside, I usually look at several of the top pages listed,
sometimes as many as 10-20 of them, and select one or two that provide
the most useful, complete and interesting information and analyses.
The first few links are usually the best, since the google algorithm
selects the most popular to be first ones, and in my experience the
best links are usually the most popular, especially among academic or
historic analyses.

If you say that in a posting years ago I once provided a link to a
page on a "white supremacist" web site, then I believe you, though I
was unaware of it at the time. I probably didn't even bother to check
anything on the web site other than the page I was linking to. It's
also surprising to me, since I would wonder how such an offensive web
site could be popular enough to make it to the top of the google
listings.

Anyway, thank you for your analysis of Germany's Christian
denominations in the 1930s. It was very helpful.

[SomeGuy]

Glad to help.  It wasn't sarcastic at all.  I am well aware of the issues with Wikipedia you cited, as well as the general concerns people have with an encyclopedia that people can just edit (which are mostly misplaced, because as you pointed out in practice the pages are pretty tightly controlled by the editors).  So I was willing to find other sources to make the point, I just felt that as fairly well-research articles on a (now) politically neutral topic, they were more effective for summing up a wide range of information than to go through the links and the search pages and find the various accredited articles directly.

Growing up, my parents owned several encyclopedias, namely their Student Handbooks from when they were in college in the 70s.  They always made a point of making me look things up for myself when I had questions.  As a result of this, I know what a "real" encyclopedia article looks like, and I appreciate the job pages like Wikipedia have done, even while acknowledging some of the issues you addressed.

Look, I am not emotionally invested in anything that happens on this board, and when I start to become so, I leave for an extended period of time.  I don't hold grudges, and I am here because I genuinely want to discuss certain issues that I can't in real life outside friends/family, not all of whom read as widely as I do.  So, provided someone, say, refrains from repeatedly implying that I am a liar and/or a moron, I am happy to be (reasonably) civil.  I got out of the Army almost seven years ago, and at that time I, barring possibly law enforcement officials, lost my legal obligations to respond politely to "Hey, Fuckface"-type comments from my elders.

That aside, I do wish sometimes that you take a little more time when selecting links in response to requests for further information.  The article from the white supremacist website was an egregious example, which I took as nothing more than a sign of relative haste in responding.  Like, I read Oswald Spengler.  Some of his shorter works, I have read as PDFs, many of which are hosted and offered for free by sites like "Aryan_Nation" or what-have-you.  It is simply one of the unfortunate drawbacks of getting free stuff, and I don't feel bad in reading it anyways, but I would be hesitant to link directly to the site as opposed to downloading it and attaching it instead (though amnot sure that is an option here).  In general, I try to cognizant that the source says almost as much as the link itself, even if I know what is in there to be true from other, not web-accessible sources.

Not trying to tell you how to post, just throwing it out there.

[John J. Xenakis]

*** 11-Feb-17 World View -- Grexit risk: Greece may refuse a new round of austerity

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Grexit risk: Greece may refuse a new round of austerity
  
• Greece will evacuate 75,000 people in Thessaloniki to defuse WW II bomb
  

****
**** Grexit risk: Greece may refuse a new round of austerity
****


Hundreds of firefighters in uniform in Athens protest working conditions on Wednesday (AP)

Years before the term "Brexit" was invented, referring to Britain
leaving the European Union, people were talking about a possible
"Grexit," referring to Greece leaving the euro currency and returning
to its old drachma currency. As Greece enters new negotiations with
its lender for another bailout loan, some people are suggesting that
Grexit may be a reality this time.

Greece faces a &euro;7.5 billion debt repayment in July. In order to
meet that payment, Greece's lenders -- the European Central Bank
(ECB), the European Commission (EC), and the International Monetary
Fund(IMF) -- will have to lend Greece more money. (This is like
borrowing from your MasterCard to pay your Visa.)

So there's plenty of time to negotiate an agreement by July, and
that's why the lenders are meeting with Greece now. Unsurprisingly, a
meeting on Friday in Brussels failed to reach an agreement after five
hours.

According to Dutch Finance Minister Jeroen Dijsselbloem:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"We made substantial progress today and are close to
> common ground for the mission to return to Athens in the coming
> week. [All sides have] a clear understanding that a timely
> finalization of the second (bailout) review is in everybody’s
> interest."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

So there'll be more meetings next week in the hope of reaching a
breakthrough by the next meeting of eurozone finance ministers on
February, but no really expects that either. In fact, it's unlikely
that the impasse will be broken before the very last moment, and that
would be just before the debt payment is due in July.

However, there are other kinds of deadlines that come sooner. There
will be elections in the Netherlands on March 15 and in France in
April through June. It would be nice to get a final settlement before
those elections, since the election results may force the negotiations
to start from the beginning.

The creditors are demanding that Greece increase its budget surplus
from 2% of GDP in 2017 to 3.5% in 2018. This would require more tax
increases, broadening the tax base, and more cuts in pensions. But
many in Greece's government are saying enough is enough. Pensions
have already been cut 11 times since the onset of the crisis in 2010,
and the government is refusing to cut them further.

The Greek people may be unwilling to tolerate any more austerity. If
Greece's prime minister Alexis Tsipras goes along with the pension
cuts, then his government may lose a vote of confidence, forcing new
elections before July. Greece's bond yields are also beginning to
spike up to crisis levels, indicating that investors are getting very
nervous about Greece again, just like the old day. And in that case,
Grexit may really occur this time.

So things are still pretty calm, but don't be surprised if the old
days come back, and there are several weekly crises to navigate.
Kathimerini and AP and Nasdaq

Related Articles

• Greece financial crisis threatened after Tsipras announces new spending program (15-Dec-2016)
  
  
• Workers riot as Greece braces for new austerity measures (09-May-2016)
  
  
• Alexis Tsipras' far-left Syriza party wins historic election in Greece (26-Jan-2015)
  

****
**** Greece will evacuate 75,000 people in Thessaloniki to defuse WW II bomb
****

A state of emergency has been declared in Thessaloniki and surrounding
municipalities after a 500-pound unexploded World War II bomb was
found during work to expand underground fuel storage tanks.

The bomb was dropped during an air raid in the city on September 17,
1944, around lunchtime. It was dropped by British and American planes
targeting rail facilities held by the Nazis.

Around 72,000 residents will be subjected to a forced evacuation
before the bomb disposal unit will start its operation on Sunday
morning. The evacuation zone will be 2 km (1.2 miles) around the
bomb. This will be the biggest evacuation in Greece since World War
II. At first the team will remove the detonator and will then
transport the bomb to a firing range for controlled explosion.
AP and Russia Today

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Greece, Grexit,
European Central Bank, ECB, European Commission, EC,
International Monetary Fund, IMF, Jeroen Dijsselbloem,
Alexis Tsipras, Thessaloniki

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe

[John J. Xenakis]

*** 12-Feb-17 World View -- Iraq: Supporters of al-Sadr and al-Maliki turn again to violence in Baghdad

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Iraq: Supporters of al-Sadr and al-Maliki turn again to violence in Baghdad
  
• Iraq's army poised to begin Battle of Mosul in the west
  

****
**** Iraq: Supporters of al-Sadr and al-Maliki turn again to violence in Baghdad
****


Security forces stand guard as supporters of Iraqi cleric Muqtada al-Sadr protest on Saturday. The protests turned violent later. (AFP)

Seven people were killed on Saturday during protests that turned
violent after thousands of people flooding into central Baghdad to
protest Iraq government corruption.

Several hours later, at least seven Katyusha rockets were launched
from northern Baghdad, landing in the heavily protected
Green Zone.

The huge protests were called by the powerful Shia cleric Moqtada
al-Sadr, whom some of you may remember as playing a highly contentious
role in the Iraq war ten years ago, challenging US forces with his
Mahdi militias. He's very closely linked to the clerics in Iran.

Al-Sadr's political enemy is former prime minister Nouri Al-Maliki.
He became prime minister in 2006 with America's help, and remained in
office for eight years. In 2008, al-Maliki ordered the Iraqi army to
clean out the city of Basra, the stronghold of al-Sadr's militias.
Some of you may remember al-Maliki as the person in charge when
President Obama withdrew all American forces from Iraq in December
2011. Al-Maliki's first action was to purge Sunnis from Iraq's
government.

Al-Maliki's reign was so destructive and divisive to Iraqi society
that he was forced out in 2014. The current prime minister is Haider
al-Abadi, who has been trying to bring the country together again, but
who is being charged by al-Sadr with corruption, and with supporting
the return of al-Maliki in elections scheduled for September. At the
same time, al-Abadi is head of the Iraqi army which is attempting to
recapture Mosul from the so-called Islamic State (IS or ISIS or ISIL
or Daesh).

The protests and violence between supporters of the al-Sadr and
al-Maliki are Shia versus Shia Muslim violence. That violence is
expected to increase as the September elections approach. But
one-third of Iraq's population are Sunni Muslims, and their role in
the September elections is still to be fully defined. Middle East Eye and BBC and
Washington Post

Related Articles

• Arrest warrant for Iraq's VP plunges Iraq's government into crisis (21-Dec-2011)
  
  
• Iraq's Moqtada al-Sadr says attack Americans, not each other (09-Apr-2007)
  
  
• Iraqi Sunnis are turning against al-Qaeda in Iraq (01-Apr-2007)

****
**** Iraq's army poised to begin Battle of Mosul in the west
****

Iraq's prime minister Haider al-Abadi had hoped that the army, heavily
backed by US and coalition warplanes and logistics, would have
completed its recapture of Mosul from ISIS by the end of 2016, but the
battle is taking far longer than expected. According to Iraq's
government, east Mosul with a population of 500,000 has been taken and
cleared of ISIS fighters, and the army is now poised to begin a
decisive battle to retake western Mosul, with a population of 750,000.

The urban style fighting is extremely nasty. ISIS has laid
hundreds of booby-trapped explosive devices in buildings throughout
the city. The ISIS fighters move around in tunnel systems
that have been built in preparation for this battle.

The government now estimates that the Battle of Mosul will take about
two more months. Air Force Times and CBS News and Washington Post (13-Jan)

Related Stories

• Iraq, ISIS and the West prepare for the Great Battle for Mosul to begin soon (01-Oct-2016)
  
  
• Iraq in major crisis after catastrophic fall of Mosul to ISIS (11-Jun-2014)
  
  
• Kurds battle ISIS for strategic Mosul Dam in Iraq (18-Aug-2014)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Iraq, Iran, Muqtada al-Sadr,
Nouri Al-Maliki, Haider al-Abadi, Baghdad, Mosul,
Islamic State / of Iraq and Syria/Sham/the Levant, IS, ISIS, ISIL, Daesh

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe

[John J. Xenakis]

*** 13-Feb-17 World View -- After Syria's so-called ceasefire, tensions grow over the future of Bashar al-Assad

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Hezbollah keeps on fighting, but says it will honor Syria ceasefire
  
• Tensions grow over the future of Bashar al-Assad
  

****
**** Hezbollah keeps on fighting, but says it will honor Syria ceasefire
****


Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah on Sunday (al-Manar)

On Sunday, Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, Iran's
puppet terrorist organization, gave a major televised speech to his
followers insisting that Hezbollah fully supported the ceasefire
agreement that had been negotiated three weeks ago by Russia, Iran and
Turkey. He said that he was responding to reports in the Arab press
that there were major disagreements between Iran and Russia, and
claimed that he wanted the forces of Syria's president Bashar al-Assad
to keep on fighting, and to continue to eliminate as much of the Sunni
population as possible. Nasrallah contradicted those reports in his
televised speech:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"We [support] an agreement that ends the bloodshed and
> paves way for a national reconciliation [in Syria]. Hezbollah and
> Iran support the ceasefire, the reconciliation, and the political
> settlement in Syria, while some Arab states are still backing the
> military option.
>
> Hezbollah strongly supports, not just the Astana ceasefire, any
> ceasefire agreed upon in Syria [in order to] prevent bloodshed and
> pave the way for political solutions."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Nasrallah was referring to the peace talks that were held last month
in Astana, the capital city of Kazakhstan.

Nonetheless, there is currently no ceasefire. Hezbollah forces took
the lead in fighting in the region called Wadi Barada in the suburbs
of Damascus, under control of anti-Assad rebels who are theoretically
supposed to be protected by the ceasefire agreement. According to
Nasrallah, Hezbollah is continuing to fight "terrorists" in Syria.

In fact, none of the groups fighting in Syria -- Iran, al-Assad,
Hezbollah, Russia, Turkey -- is honoring the ceasefire. The next
round of peace talks is scheduled for February 20.

As I've been writing for years, Generational Dynamics predicts that in
the approaching Clash of Civilizations world war, China, Pakistan and
the Sunni Muslim countries will be on one side, and the US, Russia,
India and Iran will be on the other side. Reuters and Press TV (Tehran)

Related Articles

• Russia, Iran, Turkey sign farcical Syria peace agreement (25-Jan-2017)
  
  
• U.N. Security Council adopts farcical 'peace plan' for Syria (22-Mar-2012)
  
  
• Kofi Annan resigns in failure as Syria envoy (03-Aug-2012)
  
  
• Syria's 'peace conference' proceeds as total farce (29-Jan-2014)
  

****
**** Tensions grow over the future of Bashar al-Assad
****

Reports of disagreements between Russia and Iran began with last
month's Astana peace talks because they didn't go as plan. There was
sharp disagreement over the participation of the United States in the
negotiations, which Russia favored and which Iran considered to be
unacceptable.

The final statement produced by the Astana talks called for a
ceasefire, but no Syrians were party to the statement, as it was
signed only by Turkey, Iran and Russia. The negotiators for the
anti-Assad rebels wouldn't sign it unless it called for al-Assad to
step down. Al-Assad's negotiators wouldn't sign it because they
objected to Turkey's participation, and to Turkish forces in northern
Syria where they're fighting ISIS.

The catalyst for all these disagreements is al-Assad himself. It's
now widely agreed that al-Assad is so divisive that there will never
be peace in Syria as long as he's in power. At the very least, he
would have to step down and be replaced by someone from his own
Alawite clan.

The anti-Assad rebels want him gone. The Turks want him gone too, but
are willing to put up with him if it means an end to the Syrian war.
The Russians want their military bases to lie within a stable Syria,
but they're not tied to al-Assad, and are willing to consider having
him step down at some time in the near future.

But Iran is adamant that al-Assad must stay, and cannot even be
replaced by someone with similar policies. According to one analysis,
the cause springs from the fact that Iran is quite isolated in the
region, as the only Shia Muslim state, but surrounded by Sunni Muslim
and Christian states. Thus, Iran is forced to rely on non-state
alliances -- the Houthis in Yemen, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Northern
Alliance in Afghanistan, the Badr Organization in Iraq, Islamic Jihad
in Gaza, and Shia/Alawite Bashar al-Assad in Syria -- forming the
"Shia Crescent." According to this analysis, if Iran is not
completely loyal to al-Assad, then all the other non-state groups in
its coalition will receive a signal that they're expendable as well,
which would destabilize the entire coalition. Instead, Iran sees that
it must remain completely loyal to al-Assad, and Hezbollah militias
must remain in Syria to protect Iran's interests there -- including
from the Turks and the Russians.

During the peace talks in Astana, Turkey demanded that Hezbollah's
militias be pulled out of Syria, and Iran rejected that demand for the
reasons just given.

In fact, according to Debka, Iran is planning for a much more
aggressive role for Hezbollah in Syria. As long-time readers know, I
like to reference Debka's subscriber-only newsletter (sent to me by a
subscriber), which is written from Israel's point of view, because
they have military and intelligence sources that provide valuable
insights. However, as usual, I have to warn readers that they
definitely do get some things wrong. The information that I'm
presenting here from their newsletter is not confirmed by any other
sources I've seen, but it's generally consistent with other reports.

According to the newsletter, Iran is developing an "unacknowledged
cold war" with Russia, by taking control of assets within Syria that
give it enough influence to challenge both Russia and al-Assad. Some
of these steps are as follows:

• The National Defense Force (NDF) militia has been set up to
  draw in the poor, jobless and forgotten elements of Syrian society by
  lavishing on them wealth and influence far beyond the wages of Syrian
  army regulars.
  
• The Hezbollah militias have been given a clandestine task: Winning
  young Syrians over to join them instead of the Syrian army. In this
  way, Iran is sapping the central regime's authority and boosting
  Iranian influence in Damascus.
  
• Iranian agents have bought up blocks of Syrian real estate, mainly
  in Damascus, and has been licensed as operator of Syria's mobile phone
  service.
  
• Iran has increased the number of Shia holy places in Damascus and
  Homs in keeping with the massive displacement of Sunni populations as
  refugees.

According to the newsletter, Iran can use these assets as leverage in
any future peace negotiations for Syria, in order to guarantee that
its interests are fully protected. The National (UAE, 28-Jan) and Reuters (25-Jan) and Middle East Eye and Debka


KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Lebanon, Iran, Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah, Syria,
Turkey, Russia, Astana, Kazakhstan, National Defense Force, NDF

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe

[John J. Xenakis]

*** 14-Feb-17 World View -- America's likely response to N. Korean test: THAAD, Aegis missile defense systems

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• UN Security Council condemns North Korea missile tests
  
• China's foreign policy becomes complicated by North Korean test
  
• America's likely response: More THAAD and Aegis missile defense systems
  

****
**** UN Security Council condemns North Korea missile tests
****


South Korean TV coverage on Sunday of North Korean missile test (AFP)

The United Nations Security Council met in emergency session
on Monday, and issued a statement strongly condemning North
Korea's ballistic missile launches.

The missile was launched on Sunday from North Korea’s Banghyon air
base in the western North Pyongang Province. It reached an apogee of
344 miles and traveled out to about 313 miles before splashing into
the Sea of Japan. Analysts say that the missile test is significant
because the new missiles use solid fuel, and because it can be
launched from vehicles traveling over rough terrain, both of which
make them harder to detect than liquid-fuel-based missiles.

The missile test shows that it could reach targets in South Korea,
China and Japan, and that North Korea is getting close to developing a
nuclear missile that could reach the United States.

The UN Security Council statement said:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"The members of the Security Council deplore all the
> Democratic People’s Republic of Korea ballistic missile
> activities, including these launches. ...
>
> [We call] upon all member states to redouble their efforts to
> implement fully the measures imposed on the Democratic People’s
> Republic of Korea by the Security Council."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Some Security Council members have called for imposing additional
economic sanctions on North Korea, but are few choices left beyond
those that have already been imposed. Furthermore, it's pretty clear
that North Korea will continue developing nuclear and missile
technology irrespective of any imposed sanctions. Reuters and Defense News and Deutsche Welle

Related Articles

• China-North Korea tensions high after nuclear test (09-Jan-2016)
  
  
• U.N. promises 'response' to North Korea firing midrange missiles (30-Mar-2014)
  

****
**** China's foreign policy becomes complicated by North Korean test
****

On Monday, China's Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang had to
answer questions about North Korea's ballistic missile test. The
exchanges became fairly testy, illustrating how anxious China is about
the situation, and about how complicated it's making China's foreign
policy. Here are some excerpts showing the testy exchanges (the DPRK
is North Korea, and the ROK is South Korea):

> [indent]<QUOTE>Q: The DPRK allegedly tested a new type of
> nuclear-capable missile yesterday. ...
>
> A: We have noted relevant reports and are closely following the
> developments. The Security Council resolutions contain clear
> provisions on launches using ballistic missile technology by the
> DPRK. China is opposed to the DPRK's launch which violates the
> Security Council resolutions.
>
> Given the current circumstances, relevant parties should not
> engage in mutually provocative moves which could heighten regional
> tensions. All parties need to exercise restraint in a joint effort
> to maintain regional peace and stability. ...
>
> Q: There is sort of a saying that China has leverage over the
> DPRK. Has the US communicated with China over the missile test and
> asked China to do more? Analysts speculate that the missile test
> is an opportunity for China to tie up its greater cooperation on
> the Korean nuclear issue with US cooperation in keeping peace and
> stability of the South China Sea. Is that a valid speculation?
>
> A: The root of the DPRK nuclear and missile issue lies in the
> differences between the DPRK and the US and between the DPRK and
> the ROK. As a permanent member of the Security Council and a
> responsible member of the international community, China has
> always enforced the Council's resolutions in their entirety,
> promoted peace talks, and made unremitting efforts to facilitate
> the settlement of the issue of Korean Peninsula. China's efforts
> have been widely acknowledged and acclaimed by the international
> community. ...
>
> Q: You just mentioned that the root of the DPRK nuclear and
> missile issue lies in the differences between the DPRK and the US
> and between the DPRK and the ROK. Could you be more specific as to
> how the differences between the DPRK and the ROK lead to the
> nuclear and missile issue?
>
> A: What I said just now was that the root of the DPRK nuclear and
> missile issue lies in the differences between the DPRK and the US
> and between the DPRK and the ROK. This is not the first time for
> us to say so. This is a viewpoint that has been repeatedly
> emphasized.
>
> Q: Does China believe that Washington should take the initiative
> on tackling the issue of missile test by the DPRK?
>
> A: The root of the DPRK nuclear and missile issue lies in the
> differences between the DPRK and the US and between the DPRK and
> the ROK. ...
>
> Q: US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said that China, who has
> complete control of what sustains the government of the DPRK,
> should play a bigger role. Do you agree with him?
>
> A: I have actually given the answer when addressing other
> journalists' questions. The root of the DPRK nuclear and missile
> issue is the differences between the DPRK and the US and between
> the DPRK and the ROK. Given that, we hope that relevant parties
> make more efforts to resolve the DPRK nuclear and missile
> issue."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

As you can see, an exasperated Geng Shuang answered several questions
the same way, essentially blaming the United States and South Korea.
I'll bet he was happy when that press conference was over. AP and China Foreign Ministry

****
**** America's likely response: More THAAD and Aegis missile defense systems
****

Last year, the US and South Korea announced the deployment of the
Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) in South Korea. It's
considered to be the most advance anti-missile system available
anywhere today because it can blast incoming missiles out of the sky
with 100% success rate. The stated purpose of the deployment would
be to protect South Korea from a North Korean ballistic missile
attack.

China has expressed enormous fury over the installation of THAAD in
South Korea. When the announcement was made last year, Chinese media
have attacked South Korea with inflammatory rhetoric, and recommended
harsh economic sanctions against South Korea. China has even been
calling for anti-THAAD demonstrations in South Korea.

The reason that China has been freaking out over THAAD is that it also
protects South Korea from a ballistic missile attack launched by
China. Furthermore, THAAD's advance detection systems would provide
early warning for a Chinese missile attack on the United States.

Sunday's ballistic missile test by North Korea severely complicates
China's foreign policy with regard to this issue, because it
makes a THAAD system in South Korea even more necessary. According
to Chinese media:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"Establishing THAAD on the Korean Peninsula has always
> been part of Washington’s plan to expand and enhance its
> anti-missile network in the region. Aside from anti-missile
> cooperation with allies such as Japan and Australia, the US has
> also deployed the THAAD system in Hawaii and Guam, destroyers with
> missile interceptors in the Sea of Japan, and Patriot Advanced
> Capability-3 interceptors on the Japanese soil. ...
>
> However, inviting the ROK to join the game being played by the US
> and Japan does not just respond to the DPRK’s nuclear threats but
> also places more countries including China under US military
> surveillance. Keeping Japan and the ROK committed to its Asian
> policy would be another boon to the US. ...
>
> However, the two allies are yet to offer any solid evidence to
> reassure Beijing that the anti-missile battery does not target any
> third party. Nor have they taken any action such as removing
> radars that might be used to spy on China to prove their
> point. China will not sit idle while Washington and Seoul press
> ahead with THAAD in the name of handling the “DPRK
> threat”."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Another system is the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) system.
It's a centralized, automated, command-and-control (C2) and weapons
control system that was designed as a total weapon system, from
detection to kill. The high-powered radar is able to perform search,
track, and missile guidance functions simultaneously, with a track
capacity of more than 100 targets. There are currently 84 U.S. Navy
ships in service with the AEGIS Weapons System installed: 22 Cruisers
and 62 Destroyers. There are an additional three new construction
Destroyers with the AEGIS Weapon System installed that will enter
service in FY 2018.

The North Korean missile test is going to substantially increase
demand for additional THAAD and Aegis system, and pose additional
problems for China's planned missile attack on the US and its allies.
China Daily and Global Times (Beijing) and US Navy

Related Articles

• China's fury grows over South Korea's plan to deploy THAAD anti-missile system (10-Aug-2016)
  
  
• China, Russia vociferously object to South Korea's THAAD missile system deployment (28-Jul-2016)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, North Korea, UN Security Council,
China, Geng Shuang, South Korea,
Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, THAAD,
Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense system, BMD

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe

[John J. Xenakis]

(02-10-2017, 07:45 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: > Look, I am not emotionally invested in anything that happens on
> this board, and when I start to become so, I leave for an extended
> period of time. I don't hold grudges, and I am here because I
> genuinely want to discuss certain issues that I can't in real life
> outside friends/family, not all of whom read as widely as I do.
> So, provided someone, say, refrains from repeatedly implying that
> I am a liar and/or a moron, I am happy to be (reasonably) civil.
> I got out of the Army almost seven years ago, and at that time I,
> barring possibly law enforcement officials, lost my legal
> obligations to respond politely to "Hey, Fuckface"-type comments
> from my elders.

Well, thanks for that description. Since I'm committed to writing
about Generational Dynamics every day, I don't have the
option to leave, so I have to stay and fight it out every time.

I was perhaps unfair in accusing you of using the "bait and mock"
technique and calling you a troll, but in my own defense
I did tell you the reasons why, and I accepted your explanation
and apologized.

As you know, I get attacked by a lot of people. Last year I was a
special target of paid Russian trolls, though they seem to be backing
off now, since they aren't getting anywhere with me. But I get
attacked from all angles. Here is a sample list of things that I've
been accused of: I'm a neocon, I'm a Communist, I'm a Fascist, I'm a
libtard, I only read the liberal media, I only read the conservative
media, Soros is paying me, the cia is paying me, the pentagon is
paying me, I'm a Russian troll, I'm a liberal trojan horse sent to
destroy conservatism from within, I'm not even a man, I'm uneducated,
I'm naive, I'm stupid, I've never actually been to Azerbaijan, I've
been coasting entirely off the history I learned in middle school, I'm
fake news, I'm a pathetic propagandist, I'm irrational, I'm tabloid
garbage, I'm a mentally unhinged writer, I'm a lunatic, etc., etc.,
etc., etc. So I've developed an arsenal of techniques for responding
to attacks. Lately I've been trying the "whatever" technique, which
may work better than simply calling someone an idiot, which really
only works about half the time, and so isn't particularly effective.

I haven't been called a Fuckface, but the day is still young.

By the way, my father loved the Encyclopædia Britannica, and we
always had it around.

[TeacherinExile]

(02-14-2017, 02:48 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(02-10-2017, 07:45 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: >   Look, I am not emotionally invested in anything that happens on
>   this board, and when I start to become so, I leave for an extended
>   period of time.  I don't hold grudges, and I am here because I
>   genuinely want to discuss certain issues that I can't in real life
>   outside friends/family, not all of whom read as widely as I do.
>   So, provided someone, say, refrains from repeatedly implying that
>   I am a liar and/or a moron, I am happy to be (reasonably) civil.
>   I got out of the Army almost seven years ago, and at that time I,
>   barring possibly law enforcement officials, lost my legal
>   obligations to respond politely to "Hey, Fuckface"-type comments
>   from my elders.

Well, thanks for that description.  Since I'm committed to writing
about Generational Dynamics every day, I don't have the
option to leave, so I have to stay and fight it out every time.

I was perhaps unfair in accusing you of using the "bait and mock"
technique and calling you a troll, but in my own defense
I did tell you the reasons why, and I accepted your explanation
and apologized.

As you know, I get attacked by a lot of people.  Last year I was a
special target of paid Russian trolls, though they seem to be backing
off now, since they aren't getting anywhere with me.  But I get
attacked from all angles.  Here is a sample list of things that I've
been accused of: I'm a neocon, I'm a Communist, I'm a Fascist, I'm a
libtard, I only read the liberal media, I only read the conservative
media, Soros is paying me, the cia is paying me, the pentagon is
paying me, I'm a Russian troll, I'm a liberal trojan horse sent to
destroy conservatism from within, I'm not even a man, I'm uneducated,
I'm naive, I'm stupid, I've never actually been to Azerbaijan, I've
been coasting entirely off the history I learned in middle school, I'm
fake news, I'm a pathetic propagandist, I'm irrational, I'm tabloid
garbage, I'm a mentally unhinged writer, I'm a lunatic, etc., etc.,
etc., etc.  So I've developed an arsenal of techniques for responding
to attacks.  Lately I've been trying the "whatever" technique, which
may work better than simply calling someone an idiot, which really
only works about half the time, and so isn't particularly effective.

I haven't been called a Fuckface, but the day is still young.

By the way, my father loved the Encyclopædia Britannica, and we
always had it around.

I've been holding back on this issue for some time, so here goes...

I, too, have walked away from this forum once before--only to embrace it again--for much the same reasons cited by SomeGuy.  (I, for one, would hate to see him go.)  One of the main attractions of The Fourth Turning for me was its nonpartisan approach to generational theory.  Indeed, the book struck me as distinctly apolitical, and at a time when the political passions of the Left and Right were running hot--and still are.  I'd like to think this forum is an "oasis of civility in an increasingly uncivil society."  That would be the ideal anyway.  The webmaster should be committed--and I'm not saying he isn't--to keeping comments civil.  But too often, some of the overheated rhetoric on this forum has been an affront to standards of civility.  Allowing trolls to blog unchecked and uncensored on this forum runs the same risk as that stated in Gresham's Law: the bad drives out the good. 

I blog on this forum, not for affirmation, but to have my views challenged, perhaps even changed by dint of some reasoning much more persuasive than my own.  I was not the kind of school teacher who stood in front of the class with arms folded and dared the students to disagree with me.  (Quite the contrary, it was actually very hard to elicit any debate at all by the time I left the teaching profession in 2003.)  On this forum I expect a civil and spirited debate, one that offers sound arguments and counterarguments.  And, yes, pushback that exposes my own faulty logic or political hypocrisy.  I'm not looking to form a Mutual Admiration Society with anyone here.  I might agree with you wholeheartedly one moment but then stringently disagree with you in the next. 

Having said that, though, I will admit that I do not suffer fools gladly.  By that, I mean--first and foremost--mean people.  If you cannot best my argument by superior reason, I will no longer deign to debate you if all you have by way of rebuttal are ad hominen attacks.  There's quite enough of that already in our body politic today.  And by the way that didn't start with Millennials.  Check out the heated exchange between William F. Buckley and Gore Vidal in the historical documentary The Best of Enemies, if you want to trace where our split-screen TV shout-fests originated. 

So all I can say in conclusion is: Practice tact.  I struggle with that myself sometimes.

[Marypoza]

(02-14-2017, 03:58 PM)TeacherinExile Wrote:

(02-14-2017, 02:48 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(02-10-2017, 07:45 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: >   Look, I am not emotionally invested in anything that happens on
>   this board, and when I start to become so, I leave for an extended
>   period of time.  I don't hold grudges, and I am here because I
>   genuinely want to discuss certain issues that I can't in real life
>   outside friends/family, not all of whom read as widely as I do.
>   So, provided someone, say, refrains from repeatedly implying that
>   I am a liar and/or a moron, I am happy to be (reasonably) civil.
>   I got out of the Army almost seven years ago, and at that time I,
>   barring possibly law enforcement officials, lost my legal
>   obligations to respond politely to "Hey, Fuckface"-type comments
>   from my elders.

Well, thanks for that description.  Since I'm committed to writing
about Generational Dynamics every day, I don't have the
option to leave, so I have to stay and fight it out every time.

I was perhaps unfair in accusing you of using the "bait and mock"
technique and calling you a troll, but in my own defense
I did tell you the reasons why, and I accepted your explanation
and apologized.

As you know, I get attacked by a lot of people.  Last year I was a
special target of paid Russian trolls, though they seem to be backing
off now, since they aren't getting anywhere with me.  But I get
attacked from all angles.  Here is a sample list of things that I've
been accused of: I'm a neocon, I'm a Communist, I'm a Fascist, I'm a
libtard, I only read the liberal media, I only read the conservative
media, Soros is paying me, the cia is paying me, the pentagon is
paying me, I'm a Russian troll, I'm a liberal trojan horse sent to
destroy conservatism from within, I'm not even a man, I'm uneducated,
I'm naive, I'm stupid, I've never actually been to Azerbaijan, I've
been coasting entirely off the history I learned in middle school, I'm
fake news, I'm a pathetic propagandist, I'm irrational, I'm tabloid
garbage, I'm a mentally unhinged writer, I'm a lunatic, etc., etc.,
etc., etc.  So I've developed an arsenal of techniques for responding
to attacks.  Lately I've been trying the "whatever" technique, which
may work better than simply calling someone an idiot, which really
only works about half the time, and so isn't particularly effective.

I haven't been called a Fuckface, but the day is still young.

By the way, my father loved the Encyclopædia Britannica, and we
always had it around.

I've been holding back on this issue for some time, so here goes...

I, too, have walked away from this forum once before--only to embrace it again--for much the same reasons cited by SomeGuy.  (I, for one, would hate to see him go.)  One of the main attractions of The Fourth Turning for me was its nonpartisan approach to generational theory.  Indeed, the book struck me as distinctly apolitical, and at a time when the political passions of the Left and Right were running hot--and still are.  I'd like to think this forum is an "oasis of civility in an increasingly uncivil society."  That would be the ideal anyway.  The webmaster should be committed--and I'm not saying he isn't--to keeping comments civil.  But too often, some of the overheated rhetoric on this forum has been an affront to standards of civility.  Allowing trolls to blog unchecked and uncensored on this forum runs the same risk as that stated in Gresham's Law: the bad drives out the good. 

I blog on this forum, not for affirmation, but to have my views challenged, perhaps even changed by dint of some reasoning much more persuasive than my own.  I was not the kind of school teacher who stood in front of the class with arms folded and dared the students to disagree with me.  (Quite the contrary, it was actually very hard to elicit any debate at all by the time I left the teaching profession in 2003.)  On this forum I expect a civil and spirited debate, one that offers sound arguments and counterarguments.  And, yes, pushback that exposes my own faulty logic or political hypocrisy.  I'm not looking to form a Mutual Admiration Society with anyone here.  I might agree with you wholeheartedly one moment but then stringently disagree with you in the next. 

Having said that, though, I will admit that I do not suffer fools gladly.  By that, I mean--first and foremost--mean people.  If you cannot best my argument by superior reason, I will no longer deign to debate you if all you have by way of rebuttal are ad hominen attacks.  There's quite enough of that already in our body politic today.  And by the way that didn't start with Millennials.  Check out the heated exchange between William F. Buckley and Gore Vidal in the historical documentary The Best of Enemies, if you want to trace where our split-screen TV shout-fests originated. 

So all I can say in conclusion is: Practice tact.  I struggle with that myself sometimes.

-- good post Teach

& John, if you don't mind my asking, exactly who is paying you?

[John J. Xenakis]

*** 15-Feb-17 World View -- Cameroon shuts down internet for English-speakers protesting French-speakers

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Cameroon shuts down internet for English-speakers protesting French-speakers
  
• Brief generational history of Cameroon
  
• English-speaking activists face death penalty for separatist protests
  

****
**** Cameroon shuts down internet for English-speakers protesting French-speakers
****


Anglophone protesters use catapult against police in Bamenda, Cameroon (RFI)

In the hope of quelling protests by the Anglophone (English-speaking)
population of Cameroon, the government shut down all internet access
to to the Anglophone regions of the country, beginning on January 17.
The shutdown has been going on for five weeks, and covers 20% of the
population.

The activist group Internet Without Borders has estimated that small
businesses have lost over $700,000 because they are no longer able to
conduct much of their business without the internet. They add that
the outage had blocked entrepreneurs who are an important part of the
economic activity of the country. The UN has said that the
termination of Internet services was an "appalling violation" of the
right to freedom of expression, because it's a clear attempt by the
government to stifle citizen protest actions.

It's interesting that the internet didn't even exist not too many
years ago, and now it's said to be a basic human right. Africa News and IT News Africa and Newsweek

****
**** Brief generational history of Cameroon
****

(See this 23-Nov-16 World View article
for the early history of Cameroon.)

Historically, Cameroon was colonized by a variety of European
countries, but by the end of World War two there were two colonies,
the Anglophone "British Cameroons" colony and the Francophone "French
Cameroun" colony.

The last generational crisis war was the "UPC Revolt," 1956-1960,
which was a bloody civil war by communists attacking the French
government in the Cameroun colony. The outcome was independence in
1961, when the British Cameroons colony and the French Cameroun colony
were merged into a single country, and the Anglophones became a
disadvantaged and marginalized minority. Today, the Anglophone
regions are known as the "Southern Cameroons."

By 1995, an Anglophone secessionist movement had begun under a group
called the Southern Cameroons National Council (SCNC). This was a
generational Awakening era, like America in the 1960s, that splits the
population along generational lines, characterized by widespread
student riots and demonstrations. The government cracked down on the
protesters, though not as violently as in some other countries in
Awakening eras (Syria, Burundi, for example). Those protests are
continuing today, with younger protesters demanding complete
independence, and older Anglophones advocating a semi-autonomous
region, but still within the nation of Cameroon. Deutsche Welle and Dibussi Tande Blog - pro-Anglophone (1-Nov-2006)

****
**** English-speaking activists face death penalty for separatist protests
****

The trial of three English-speaking protesters facing the death
penalty opened at a military court in Cameroon on Monday. The
protesters, Felix Agbor Balla, Fontem Aforteka'a Neba and Mancho
Bibixy, pleaded not guilty to charges of acts of terrorism, complicity
in acts of terrorism, insurrection, propagation of false news, calling
for civil war and calling for a return to the federal system.
However, the trial was postponed until March 23 to give the
prosecution time to gather more evidence.

The defendants are being tried under a 2014 law created to help combat
militants from Nigeria-based Islamist militant group Boko Haram whose
fighters regularly launch attacks in Cameroon.

The internet shutdown was a government response to protests that began
in November, along with a strike by English-speaking teachers, lawyers
and students over alleged government bias in favor of French-speaking
Cameroonians. At times, the protests have turned violent.

Shutting down the internet to the Southern Cameroons region is the
kind of thing that looks like an act of desperation and backfires
during a generational Awakening era. Does anyone seriously believe
that young protesters are going to stop protesting because the
internet has been shut down? It's much more likely that all the
protesters, young and old, will be infuriated by the shutdown, and
protest more vigorously, or even become more violent. RFI and Reuters

Related Articles

• Cameroon: One person killed in English-speaking vs French-speaking civil unrest (23-Nov-2016)
  
  
• Burundi's Pierre Nkurunziza follows Syria's Bashar al-Assad on path to genocide (13-Oct-2016)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Cameroon, Anglophone, Francophone,
Internet Without Borders, UPC Revolt,
British Cameroons, French Cameroun, Southern Cameroons,
Southern Cameroons National Council, SCNC,
Felix Agbor Balla, Fontem Aforteka'a Neba, Mancho Bibixy,
Nigeria, Boko Haram

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe